EP3568525B1 - Sliding pendulum bearing and measuring method therefor - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a sliding pendulum bearing for protecting a structure from dynamic stresses from predominantly horizontal impacts and a dimensioning method for such sliding pendulum bearings.

Generic sliding pendulum bearings usually have a first sliding plate, a second sliding plate and a slider movably arranged between the two sliding plates, each of the two sliding plates having a curved main sliding surface and the slider being flat with a first main sliding surface of the first sliding plate and with a second main sliding surface of the second sliding plate is in contact.

Such sliding pendulum bearings and corresponding design methods for such sliding pendulum bearings are in principle from the prior art, such as from CN 101 705 656 B1 , DE 10 2005 060375 A1 , WO 2014/173622 A1 or WO 2012/114246 A1 , well known.

Such sliding pendulum bearings are used in particular for earthquake insulation of buildings, such as houses or bridges, whose first natural frequency is typically in the range of approximately 0.5 Hz to 2 Hz. In particular, the curved main sliding surfaces can be spherically curved in accordance with DIN EN 15129:2010. If the first natural frequency is significantly lower than 0.5 Hz, the structure is sufficiently protected from earthquake-induced ground vibrations thanks to its long oscillation period. However, if the first natural frequency is greater than 2 Hz, an earthquake cannot cause significant structural displacements and associated damage due to the high rigidity of the structure.

There are currently essentially four types of different sliding pendulum bearings known. These are shown schematically in the Figures 1A to 1D shown and are briefly explained below.

On the one hand, there is the in Fig. 1A schematically illustrated sliding pendulum bearing 5 of the "single curved surface slider" type (hereinafter referred to as "single"), in which a first sliding plate 1 has a first curved main sliding surface 10 with a slider 3 and a second sliding plate 2 has a second curved main sliding surface 20 with the slider 3 is in surface contact. In the case of the single shown, sliding elements 4 are arranged between the slider 3 and the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 in order to improve the friction properties between the To be able to adjust the slider 3 and the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 of the sliding plates 1 and 2.

The special feature of the single version is that the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing is essentially defined by the contact surface between the first main sliding surface 10 and the slider 3. In contrast, the second sliding plate 2 with its second main sliding surface 20 is essentially intended to prevent the slider 3 from jamming on the first main sliding surface 10 through rotation and thus to ensure optimal contact between the slider 3 and the first main sliding surface 10 of the first sliding plate 1 to ensure.

If the single is now designed for a specific earthquake with a corresponding peak ground acceleration, only the contact between the first sliding plate 1 and the slider 3 is designed for a corresponding load case.

“Design” here means optimizing in particular the geometry and the frictional behavior of the contact surface between the slider 3 and the corresponding sliding plate 1. This can be done, for example, with the help of a linear response spectrum or using non-linear simulation. During this optimization process, a compromise must always be found between the insulation effect of the sliding pendulum bearing and the travel capacity to be maintained for the bearing movement of the sliding pendulum bearing. This means that perfect isolation of the building movement from ground movement is desired, but this can only be achieved with a very large radius of curvature of the sliding plate 1, which, however, requires a rather large travel capacity of the bearing and the building may no longer be the same after the earthquake Location stands (cf.: “recentering error”). However, since the possible path capacity for the bearing movement is limited by the specified installation space and a minimally defined re-centering capacity must be guaranteed, the isolation effect cannot be maximized.

What is meant by “interpret” can be explained, for example, using: Fig. 1E illustrate.

Fig. 1E shows a diagram in which the course of the maximum absolute building acceleration is shown as a function of a peak ground acceleration (PGA) caused by a corresponding earthquake. From the multitude of conceivable values for the peak ground acceleration, two values in particular are crucial for the design of sliding pendulum bearings. On the one hand, this is the value of the peak ground acceleration of the so-called design basis earthquake (DBE), which in the example shown is the Fig. 1E to 4 m/s ² is assumed. On the other hand, it is the value of the peak ground acceleration of the so-called maximum credible earthquake (MCE), which in the example shown is the Fig. 1E to 6 m/s ² is assumed. The design earthquake corresponds to the earthquake for which the intended structure should be insulated as best as possible from earthquake excitation. The largest probable earthquake, on the other hand, corresponds to the maximum earthquake that can be expected at the location of the structure. The value of the peak ground acceleration of the largest probable earthquake is greater than that of the design earthquake and may also be set as a multiple, for example 1.5 times, of the value of the peak ground acceleration of the design earthquake. For earthquakes with peak ground acceleration values between the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake and the largest probable earthquake, damage to the structure may occur but is still repairable.

As in Fig. 1E shown, the maximum absolute structural acceleration for a sliding pendulum bearing without friction but with optimal viscous damping (see: curve for "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping"), hereinafter referred to as a sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping, has a linear course depending on the peak ground acceleration. This course reflects the ideal insulation of the structure with a passive insulator. However, the combination of a sliding pendulum bearing with an optimal viscous damper is expensive, which is why in practice sliding pendulum bearings with friction are used.

In Fig. 1E In addition to the curve for the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping, an exemplary curve for the maximum absolute structural accelerations of a sliding pendulum bearing with friction is shown (see: curve for "Friction Pendulum"). It can be seen here that the insulation behavior for conventional structural bearings does not develop linearly depending on the peak ground acceleration. Thus, it is generally not possible for sliding pendulum bearings with friction to come close to the behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping for a variety of peak ground acceleration values.

The aim of the design or optimization of the sliding pendulum bearing with friction should be to adapt the geometry and the coefficients of friction of the sliding pendulum bearing so that the maximum absolute structural acceleration at the value for the peak ground acceleration shows a similar behavior to a sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping.

As already described above, if you are single (cf. Fig. 1A ) designed sliding pendulum bearing, the second sliding plate 2 with its second main sliding surface 20 is necessary for the rotation of the slider 3. In order to ensure that the slider rotates with as little resistance as possible, the second main sliding surface 20 is lubricated, which means that its coefficient of friction is very low (often in the range of 0.4% to 1.5%) and this friction cannot be counted as part of the friction of the first main sliding surface 10. This means that the insulation behavior of a sliding pendulum bearing designed as a single (cf. Fig. 1A ) defined solely by the curvature and friction of the first main sliding surface 10.

As a further education of the in Fig. 1A Single shown is the double type sliding pendulum bearing (hereinafter referred to as "Double"), which is in Fig. 1B is shown and is referred to in English as a “double curved surface slider”.

Analogous to the single, the double has a first sliding plate 1 with a first main sliding surface 10, a second sliding plate 2 with a second main sliding surface 20, a slider 3 and two sliding elements 4.

In contrast to the single, however, the second main sliding surface 20 is identical to the first main sliding surface 10 with regard to its effective radius and its coefficient of friction. In order to ensure the same insulation period durations of the single (5 in Fig. 1A ) and Double (5 in Fig. 1B ), the sum of the two effective radii of the double is chosen to be equal to the effective radius of the single. Since the two effective radii and the two coefficients of friction of the double are usually chosen to be the same, the entire bearing movement of the double is divided evenly between the main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 of the double. Therefore, the maximum sliding paths on the main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 of the double are each approximately half as long as the sliding path on the main sliding surface 10 of the single, which means that the double is more compact.

A further education of the in Fig. 1b Doubles 5 shown is the in Fig. 1C shown double with joint (hereinafter referred to as "double with joint"), where the slider 3 is formed in two parts 3a and 3b, which corresponds to a joint. In English, the double with articulated is called "double curved surface slider with articulated slider" 5. Analogous to the double without joint ( Fig. 1B ) has the double with joint ( Fig. 1C ) a first sliding plate 1 with a first main sliding surface 10, a second sliding plate 2 with a second main sliding surface 20, a slider 3, and several sliding elements 4.

In contrast to the double without joint 5, in the double with joint the glider 3 is divided into two glider parts 3a and 3b, with the two glider parts 3a and 3b being in contact with one another via a further sliding element 4a.

Analogous to the second main sliding surface 20 of the single, this division serves to ensure optimal contact of the slider 3 or the slider parts 3a and 3b on the first main sliding surface 10 and the second main sliding surface 20.

Consequently, the insulation behavior of a double with joint is essentially defined by the contact surfaces between the sliding plates 1 and 2 with the corresponding sliding parts 3a and 3b.

Last but not least is in Fig. 1D a further developed sliding pendulum bearing in the form of a so-called “triple friction pendulum” 5 (hereinafter referred to as “triple”) is shown.

Analogous to the double with a joint, a triple has a first sliding plate 1 with a first main sliding surface 10, a second sliding plate 2 with a second main sliding surface 20 as well as a slider 3 and various sliding elements 4. Also analogous to the double with joint, the glider 3 of the triple has a first glider part 3a and a second glider part 3b.

In contrast to the double with joint, however, in the triple the two glider parts 3a and 3b are not in direct contact with one another, but are coupled to one another via further glider parts 3c and 3d and corresponding sliding elements 4a. The two further glider parts 3c and 3d are coupled with a joint via the articulated spherical surface, analogous to the articulated glider of the double.

With the triple, too, the predominant insulating effect of the sliding pendulum bearing occurs on the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20, which means that their dimensions are based on the dimensions of the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 of the double with joint.

As already mentioned above Fig. 1E described, the well-known sliding pendulum bearings just described (single and double without joint) all have a non-linear isolation behavior depending on the peak ground acceleration. This cannot be compensated for by the development known from the prior art in the form of the double with joint; the triple generates peak ground accelerations in the range of very small to medium almost linear behavior, but not in the range of medium to maximum peak ground accelerations.

This results in the problem that the corresponding sliding pendulum bearings have to be optimized for a certain peak ground acceleration value, but the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing is comparatively poor at peak ground acceleration values that do not correspond to the value used for the optimization. In particular, the coefficient of friction of the sliding pendulum bearing optimized for the design earthquake for peak ground acceleration values of the largest probable earthquake leads, on the one hand, to relatively poor insulation effect and, on the other hand, to relatively large bearing movements, which would mean that the bearing would be large and therefore expensive.

Consequently, it is the object of the present invention to provide a sliding pendulum bearing and a dimensioning method for such a sliding pendulum bearing, through which lower loads occur in the operating state on a structure isolated by the sliding pendulum bearing than in conventionally known sliding pendulum bearings.

This object is achieved by a sliding pendulum bearing according to claim 1 and a dimensioning method according to claim 11. Advantageous developments of the invention result from the dependent claims 2 to 10 and claims 12 and 13.

The sliding pendulum bearing according to the invention has that the first main sliding surface of the first sliding plate is designed for a first load case and the second main sliding surface of the second sliding plate is designed for a second load case, the first load case differing from the second load case.

The term “load case” refers to a specific peak ground acceleration value of a corresponding earthquake.

By designing the two main sliding surfaces with regard to their effective radii and coefficients of friction for different load cases, it is achieved that the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing for all peak ground accelerations up to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake is brought closer to the behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping than is the case with one Designing the entire sliding pendulum bearing for only one specific load case, as applies to the sliding pendulum bearings from the prior art, would be possible. This makes it possible, even at peak ground accelerations to obtain significantly improved insulation behavior beyond the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake assumed for the sliding pendulum bearing and not to increase the maximum bearing movement disproportionately.

Advantageously, the first main sliding surface is designed for a first load case with a value for the peak ground acceleration which corresponds at most to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake and at least to the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake. This results in a significantly better insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing in earthquakes with peak ground acceleration values greater than the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake, which significantly reduces potential damage to the structure at these peak ground acceleration values compared to conventional bearings. This saves, among other things, costs when repairing the structure after an earthquake with a peak ground acceleration value above the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake.

In a further development, the second main sliding surface can be designed for a second load case whose peak ground acceleration values are less than or equal to the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake. This makes it possible to improve the isolation effect of the sliding pendulum bearing for earthquakes with peak ground acceleration values below the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake compared to conventional single or double. This means that stresses on a corresponding structure caused by earthquakes with low peak ground acceleration values can be reduced. Consequently, the occurrence of fatigue symptoms on the structure caused by earthquakes with small peak ground acceleration values can be significantly reduced or even avoided.

It is also expedient if the smaller of the coefficients of friction of the two main sliding surfaces, in particular and generally the coefficient of friction of the second main sliding surface, is so large that a predefined minimum shear resistance of the sliding pendulum bearing is guaranteed. Minimum shear resistance here means that a certain minimum excitation is necessary in order to trigger the sliding pendulum bearing, i.e. a movement of the slider along at least one of the two main sliding surfaces of the sliding pendulum bearing. By ensuring a predefined minimum shear resistance, wear on the sliding pendulum bearing is also reduced, since not every excitation of the structure, no matter how small, leads to a bearing movement in the sliding pendulum bearing. This is particularly advantageous if the structure is already insulated by the sliding pendulum bearing designed to withstand earthquakes with only small peak ground acceleration values without damage or excessive fatigue.

Practically, the two main sliding surfaces are also coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that the curve of the resulting absolute building acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration up to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake has an essentially linear course. The geometry of the main sliding surfaces means, for example, an effective radius of curvature of the main sliding surfaces, while the friction behavior is determined, for example, by the coefficients of friction of the respective main sliding surface. Due to the linearity of the course of the resulting absolute building acceleration depending on the peak ground acceleration, it is possible to bring the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing even closer to the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping and thus compared to the conventionally known plain bearings, which have a non-linear course of the absolute building acceleration To improve the dependence of the peak ground acceleration.

In particular, the two main sliding surfaces can be coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that a curve of the resulting absolute structural acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration comes closer to the course of the resulting absolute structural acceleration of a sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping compared to conventional sliding pendulum bearings course. This is particularly evident in the fact that the values for the resulting absolute structural acceleration are, on average, smaller for peak ground acceleration values up to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake than for the conventionally known plain bearings, or are closer to the corresponding value for the plain pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping . Thus, the sliding pendulum bearing ideally has a course that is closer to the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping than conventional sliding pendulum bearings over the entire range of the relevant peak ground acceleration values and thus comes closer to the ideal course of the insulation effect than the conventional sliding pendulum bearings.

It is also advantageous if the two main sliding surfaces are coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that the sliding path of the slider in the second load case, i.e. with smaller peak ground accelerations, is significantly larger or approximately the same size along the second main sliding surface like the glide path of the glider along the first Main sliding surface, and in the first load case, i.e. with larger to maximum peak ground accelerations, the sliding path of the glider along the first main sliding surface is larger or smaller than along the second main sliding surface. This design makes it possible to separate the effect of the two main sliding surfaces from each other. This makes it possible, for example, to reduce the travel capacity and thus the dimensions of the entire sliding pendulum bearing, which somewhat reduces the maximum possible insulating effect of the bearing according to the invention but still leads to a better insulating effect than with a conventional single or double. In order to be able to clearly separate the effect of the two main sliding surfaces and to minimize the storage path capacity, a limiting ring can be used on one of the main sliding surfaces. It should be expressly pointed out that this limitation ring does not limit the entire travel capacity of the warehouse.

According to the invention, the first main sliding surface has a first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and the second main equal surface has a second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 , where the sum of R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 is at least 1.4 times the effective radius of curvature is determined under the assumption that the sliding pendulum bearing only has a single curved main sliding surface.

Preferably, the sum R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 is in the range of 1.4 times to 2.0 times the effective radius of curvature of a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface.

The sum of R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 is also preferably greater than 2 times the effective radius of curvature of a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface. It is preferred that the travel capacity of the sliding pendulum bearing is not greater than that of the sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface or than that of a sliding pendulum bearing with two identical curved main sliding surfaces in the manner of a double, the effective radii of curvature of which are approximately 0.2485 times the Square of a desired insulation period Tiso in seconds of the structure to be protected with a sliding pendulum bearing with only one or two identical curved-shaped main sliding surfaces (single or double type).

Preferably, the first main sliding surface has a first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and the second main equal surface (20) has a second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 , where R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 are each at least 0.7 times the effective Radius of curvature of a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface.

More preferably, R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 are each larger than 0.7 times the effective radius of curvature of a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface.

It is particularly advantageous if the first main sliding surface has a first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 which is approximately as large as for a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface and the second main sliding surface has a second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 , which is in the range of 0.75 times to 2 times, and in particular in the range of 0.90 times to 1.5 times, the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 , and particularly preferably equal to the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 is. This configuration can be easily achieved starting from a single by adjusting the radius of curvature of the second main sliding surface, but differs from the design of a corresponding double without a joint in that, as already described above, with a double the effective radii of curvature of the two main sliding surfaces are the sum just correspond to the effective radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface of the single and the radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface does not already correspond to the effective radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface of the single. The design in terms of strength and thus the resulting geometry and production of the plain bearing according to the invention is considerably simplified, since, for example, two identical sliding plates can be used, which saves considerable costs both during the strength design of the plain bearing and also during its production.

It also makes sense if a first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 of the first main sliding surface in meters corresponds to approximately 0.25 times the square of a desired insulation period T _ISO in seconds of the structure to be protected by the sliding pendulum bearing. The isolation period T _ISO refers to the oscillation period of the structure with a sliding pendulum bearing. This dimensioning of the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 of the first main sliding surface results in a particularly advantageous isolation effect of the structure through the first main sliding surface for peak ground accelerations greater than the design earthquake.

It makes sense that the first main sliding surface has a first coefficient of friction μ ₁ for the friction with the slider, which is approximately as large as for a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface, and the second main sliding surface has a second coefficient of friction μ ₂ for the friction with the Slider which is in the range of lubricated friction, and in particular a value between 0.2% and 2.0%, preferably between 0.4% and 1.5%, and particularly preferably between 0.6% and 1.25% having. This advantageous design ensures that the second main sliding surface ensures good insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing, especially in the event of earthquakes with only small amplitudes.

Also advantageously, the first main sliding surface has a first coefficient of friction μ ₁ for the friction with the slider, which is approximately as large as for a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface and the second main equal surface has a second coefficient of friction μ that is lower than μ _{1 2} , which is in the range of approximately 0.2% to 1.7% when the second main equal surface is lubricated and is in the range of approximately 2% to 3.5% when the second main equal surface is not lubricated. This ensures a minimum shear resistance.

Advantageously, the second main sliding surface includes a limiting means for limiting the travel capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface. The limiting means is designed in particular as an annular stop. By providing such a limiting means on the second main sliding surface or on the second sliding plate, it is possible to separate the effect of the first main sliding surface for deflection amplitudes above the travel capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface from the effect of the second main sliding surface. This means that, particularly in the case of large earthquake excitation forces, the travel capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface can be limited in such a way that the structural dimensions of the slide bearing can be made smaller than if no limiting means is provided.

It is particularly advantageous if the limiting means is designed such that the travel capacity D ₂ of the slider on the second main sliding surface is essentially less than or equal to the travel capacity D ₁ of the slider on the first main sliding surface. The dimensions of the corresponding sliding pendulum bearing are therefore essentially determined by the travel capacity of the slider on the first main sliding surface, which means that the dimensions of the sliding pendulum bearing can be designed similar to a corresponding single.

Furthermore, it is particularly preferred if the travel capacity D ₂ of the slider on the second main sliding surface is limited to 0.8 times and preferably to 0.5 times the travel capacity D ₁ of the slider on the first main sliding surface. This further restriction of the movement capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface makes it possible to avoid excessive overall bearing movements, which result from the sum of the bearing movement on the first main sliding surface and the bearing movement on the second main sliding surface, and thus in turn save installation space and manufacturing costs.

The travel capacity D ₂ of the slider on the second main sliding surface is preferably in the range of 1.0 times to 0.25 times, preferably in the range of 1.0 times to 0.7 times the value of D ₁ of the slider the first main sliding surface.

Finally, it makes sense if the travel capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface is at least 0.1 times and in particular at least 0.2 times the travel capacity of the slider on the first main sliding surface. This minimum requirement for the travel capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface ensures that the second main sliding surface can develop its effect at least over a certain range of deflection and is therefore also able to sufficiently influence the insulation behavior of the entire sliding pendulum bearing.

Finally, the limiting means is preferably designed in such a way that the entire travel capacity of the sliding pendulum bearing is essentially limited to the extent of the movement capacity in a sliding pendulum bearing with only one main sliding surface. Further preferably, the limiting means is designed such that the total travel capacity of the sliding pendulum bearing is at most equal to and preferably smaller than the travel capacity of a sliding pendulum bearing with only one main sliding surface or than that of a sliding pendulum bearing with two identical curved-shaped main sliding surfaces (in the manner of a double). This ensures that the sliding pendulum bearing finally formed is not larger than a corresponding single and can therefore easily be used, for example, to replace an already provided sliding pendulum bearing of the single type without further structural adjustments.

The slider expediently has two slider parts, which are in flat contact with one another via a curved secondary sliding surface. The first slider part is in turn in contact with the first main sliding surface while the second slider part is in contact with the second main sliding surface. By dividing the slider into two slider parts and providing the secondary sliding surface, it is possible to ensure that the corresponding sliding surfaces of the slider contact the two main sliding surfaces regardless of the movements on both main sliding surfaces, whereby the movements along the two main sliding surfaces are decoupled. The slider, together with the slider parts, thus represents a joint which is preferably capable of decoupling the sliding paths on the two sliding surfaces or sliding plates. A particularly preferred embodiment of this sliding pendulum bearing has sliding paths of different sizes, different coefficients of friction and different effective radii on the two main sliding surfaces.

It is particularly advantageous if the frictional properties of the secondary sliding surface of the slider are designed in such a way that the smallest possible third coefficient of friction µ ₃ is present between the two glider parts, which is preferably significantly smaller than the first coefficient of friction µ ₁ and in particular has a value less than approx 2.0% (upper value of lubricated friction for μ ₂ ), preferably a value less than 1.5%, and particularly preferably a value in the range from 0.6% to 1.25%. This special choice of the coefficient of friction of the secondary sliding surface of the slider ensures that the secondary sliding surface ensures the necessary rotation of the sliding pendulum bearing without affecting the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing.

Last but not least, it is expedient if the radii of curvature and friction properties of the two main sliding surfaces of the sliding pendulum bearing are adjusted such that the sliding pendulum bearing has a recentering error of a maximum of 30%, in particular a maximum of 20% and particularly preferably a maximum of 10%. This can ensure that the insulating effect of the sliding pendulum bearing has a similar insulation behavior when the sliding pendulum bearing is triggered again, even after a previous tripping of the sliding pendulum bearing, as in the previous tripping of the sliding pendulum bearing. This ensures that the sliding pendulum bearing has a largely similar insulation effect across multiple trips and that previous tripping of the sliding pendulum bearing does not negatively influence the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing beyond an acceptable level.

A method according to the invention for dimensioning a corresponding sliding pendulum bearing describes that a first main sliding surface of the first sliding plate is designed for a first load case and a second main sliding surface of the second sliding plate is designed for a second load case, which differs from the first load case. The sliding pendulum bearing obtained in this way has the advantage compared to the conventionally known sliding pendulum bearings that its insulation behavior is ultimately improved not only for the peak ground acceleration values of the design earthquake but also for peak ground acceleration values beyond this peak ground acceleration value.

The slider advantageously has two slider parts, which are in flat contact with one another via a curved secondary sliding surface, the first slider part in turn being in contact with the first main sliding surface and the second slider part in turn being in contact with the second main sliding surface. This joint formed in this way is preferably capable of decoupling the sliding paths on the two sliding surfaces or sliding plates. A particularly preferred embodiment of the dimensioning method leads to a sliding pendulum bearing has different sliding paths, different coefficients of friction and different effective radii on the two main sliding surfaces.

Advantageously, the first main sliding surface is designed for a load case with a value for a peak ground acceleration that corresponds at most to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake and at least to the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake. This can ensure that the appropriately dimensioned sliding pendulum bearing has improved insulation behavior even in earthquakes with peak ground acceleration values between the corresponding values for the design earthquake and the largest probable earthquake and thus loads on a proposed structure caused by such earthquakes can be largely suppressed.

It makes sense to design the second main sliding surface for a second load case with a value for the peak ground acceleration that is less than or equal to the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake. This makes it possible, among other things, to suppress damage caused by repeated earthquakes with only small peak ground acceleration values, which can ultimately occur in particular in the form of fatigue symptoms.

In a further development, at least the lower coefficient of friction of one of the two main sliding surfaces, in particular the coefficient of friction of the second main sliding surface, can be selected such that a predefined minimum shear resistance of the sliding pendulum bearing is guaranteed. This makes it possible to avoid triggering of the sliding pendulum bearing in the event of only weak earthquakes and thus avoid excessive wear of the sliding pendulum bearing. As already described above, this appears to be particularly advantageous if the corresponding structure is already designed to withstand such weak earthquakes without major damage and the sliding pendulum bearing is essentially intended to protect against earthquakes with significantly larger excitations. This means that maintenance costs for the sliding pendulum bearing can be significantly reduced.

Furthermore, it makes sense if the two main sliding surfaces are coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that the curve of the resulting absolute building acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration has an essentially linear course up to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake. A linear course of the resulting absolute building acceleration compared to the peak ground acceleration corresponds to the course of the resulting absolute Building acceleration depending on the peak ground acceleration of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping and therefore closest to the ideal course. This means that, on the one hand, the behavior of the dimensioned sliding pendulum bearing can be easily estimated and, on the other hand, it is optimized towards the ideal course of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping.

Advantageously, the two main sliding surfaces are coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that a curve of the resulting absolute structural acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration has a course which, in comparison to conventional sliding pendulum bearings, closely approximates the course of the resulting absolute structural acceleration of a sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping having. In terms of its insulation behavior, a sliding pendulum bearing dimensioned in this way comes closer to the ideal insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping than with conventionally known bearings and thus, in particular, has an overall improved insulation behavior over the relevant peak ground accelerations.

Furthermore, it makes sense if the two main sliding surfaces are coordinated with one another in terms of their geometry and/or their frictional behavior in such a way that the sliding path of the slider in the second load case, i.e. with smaller peak ground acceleration values, is significantly larger along the second main sliding surface or approximately the same as along it the first main sliding surface and in the first load case, i.e. with larger peak ground acceleration values, the sliding path of the glider along the first main sliding surface is larger or smaller than along the second main sliding surface. As already indicated above, the insulating effect of the first main sliding surface can be decoupled from the effect of the second main sliding surface, particularly in the case of large earthquake excitation forces, in order to be able to better adapt the overall resulting insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing and also to reduce the required installation space for the sliding pendulum bearing.

According to the invention, in a first step of the design method, a first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and a first coefficient of friction μ ₁ are determined for the first main sliding surface under the assumption that the sliding pendulum bearing only has a single main sliding surface, and a second effective radius of curvature R for the second main sliding surface _eff,2 is selected, which is in the range of 0.75 times to 2 times, preferably in the range of 0.75 times to 1.5 times the radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface R _eff,1 , and for the second main sliding surface a second coefficient of friction μ ₂ is selected, which is between 0.2% and 2.0%, preferably between 0.4% and 1.5% and more preferably between 0.6% and 1.25% (in the range of lubricated friction ), or which is less than or equal to the first effective coefficient of friction µ ₁ , to a predefined minimum To ensure thrust resistance. The second coefficient of friction μ ₂ can in particular be at least 0.75 times smaller than the first coefficient of friction μ ₁ or can only be less than or equal to the first coefficient of friction μ ₁ and thereby ensure a predefined minimum shear resistance. This makes it possible to obtain a sliding pendulum bearing which has improved insulation behavior compared to conventional sliding pendulum bearings even at peak ground acceleration values below the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake.

Preferably, a second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 is selected for the second main sliding surface (20), which is essentially equal to the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 .

Preferably, at least 0.7 times the effective radius of curvature of the assumed sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface is selected for R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 .

Preferably, R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 are each chosen to be larger than 0.7 times the effective radius of curvature of the assumed sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface.

Preferably, a second coefficient of friction μ ₂ is selected for the second main sliding surface, which, when the second main sliding surface is lubricated, is between 0.2% and 2.0%, preferably between 0.4% and 1.5% and more preferably between 0.6% and 1 .25% and, with the second main sliding surface not lubricated, is set in such a way that a predefined minimum thrust resistance is guaranteed, whereby the coefficient of friction µ ₂ is smaller than the coefficient of friction µ ₁ .

In a further development, in a second step of the design method, the frictional properties of the structure can be determined by means of non-linear dynamic simulation of the structure with sliding pendulum bearings, taking into account both main sliding surfaces for at least one peak ground acceleration value, but in particular for all expected peak ground acceleration values from very small values up to the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake The first main sliding surface and the geometric properties of the second main sliding surface are coordinated with one another in such a way that a behavior of the maximum absolute building acceleration and/or the maximum bearing movement that is as proportional as possible to the course of the peak ground acceleration is obtained with smaller values than before the main sliding surfaces were coordinated with one another. As a result, the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing obtained from the first step of the design process can be further trimmed towards the optimal behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping.

The following rules should preferably be adhered to in the design procedure: µ ₂ is smaller than µ ₁ and D ₂ is smaller than or equal to D ₁ .

It is particularly advantageous if the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and the second coefficient of friction μ ₂ are kept constant while carrying out the second step of the design method. This makes it possible, on the one hand, to make it easier to coordinate the two main sliding surfaces with one another by limiting the adjustable parameters and, on the other hand, to ensure that the sliding pendulum bearing does not have to be completely redesigned and therefore no longer meets the framework conditions specified at the beginning.

In a third step of the design process, a maximum required travel capacity D ₁ of the slider on the first main sliding surface of the sliding pendulum bearing, which was determined to be optimal in the second step, is determined and set for the design of the sliding pendulum bearing. This step ultimately results in a restriction of the required installation space of the sliding pendulum bearing in relation to the first main sliding surface, which advantageously allows the dimensioning of the dimensioned sliding pendulum bearing to be checked and, if necessary, adjusted.

Furthermore, it is advantageous if in the second step of the design method for the second coefficient of friction μ ₂ a value typical for lubricated friction, in particular a value between 0.2% and 2%, preferably a value between 0.2% and 1.7% , preferably a value between 0.4% and 1.5% and particularly preferably a value between 0.5% and 1.0% is assumed. This specification ensures that the corresponding sliding pendulum bearing can ensure a sufficient isolation effect, especially in small earthquakes with low peak ground accelerations. This serves primarily to protect the building from signs of fatigue or damage that can be caused by weak but frequently occurring earthquake excitations.

Advantageously, in a fourth step of the design method, a second displacement capacity D ₂ of the slider on the second main sliding surface is set to a value less than or equal to the value of the first displacement capacity D ₁ of the slider on the first main sliding surface. This makes it possible to limit the dimensions of the sliding pendulum bearing by the dimensions of the first main sliding surface and thus ensure effective use of the available installation space.

Finally, it is advantageous if, in the first step of the design process, the first effective radius of curvature is R _eff,1 and the first coefficient of friction µ ₁ using the method of linear response spectrum can be determined according to DIN EN 15129:2010. On the one hand, this has the advantage that this investigation procedure is already known and well tested, which means that no new investigation procedures need to be developed. In addition, this at least partially ensures the comparability of the dimensioned sliding pendulum bearing with other sliding pendulum bearings dimensioned in accordance with the standard.

Fig. 2

den Aufbau eines Gleitpendellagers entsprechend einer ersten vorteilhaften Ausführungsform des erfindungsgemäßen Gleitpendellagers;

Fig. 3

den Aufbau eines Gleitpendellagers entsprechend einer zweiten vorteilhaften Ausführungsform des erfindungsgemäßen Gleitpendellagers;

Fig. 4A

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden absoluten Bauwerksbeschleunigung ("maximum of absolute acceleration") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("peak ground acceleration: PGA") eines entsprechend einer ersten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lagern (vgl. Kurven zu "Friction Pendulum" und "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 4B

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden horizontalen Lagerkraft ("maximum of bearing force") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der ersten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lagern (vgl. Kurven zu "Friction Pendulum" und "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 4C

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden Lagerverschiebung ("maximum of total bearing displacement") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der ersten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lagern (vgl. Kurven zu "Friction Prendulum" und "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 4D

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf des Rückzentrierfehlers ("residual total bearing displacement") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der ersten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lagern (vgl. Kurven zu "Friction Pendulum" und "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 5A

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden absoluten Bauwerksbeschleunigung ("maximum of absolute acceleration") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend einer zweiten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu einem bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lager (vgl. Kurve zu "Friction Pendulum") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 5B

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden horizontalen Lagerkraft ("maximum of bearing force") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der zweiten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu einem bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lager (vgl. Kurve zu "Friction Pendulum") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 5C

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf der maximal auftretenden Lagerverschiebung ("maximum of total bearing displacement") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der zweiten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu einem bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lager (vgl. Kurve zu "Friction Pendulum") dargestellt ist;

Fig. 5D

ein Diagramm, in welchem der Verlauf des Rückzentrierfehlers ("residual total bearing displacement") in Abhängigkeit der Spitzenbodenbeschleunigung ("PGA") eines entsprechend der zweiten Ausführungsform des Bemessungsverfahrens bemessenen Gleitpendellagers (vgl. Kurve zu "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") im Vergleich zu einem bereits bekannten vergleichbaren Lager (vgl. Kurve zu "Friction Pendulum") dargestellt ist;

Advantageous embodiments of the present invention will now be described below with reference to figures. This shows schematically

Fig. 2

the structure of a sliding pendulum bearing according to a first advantageous embodiment of the sliding pendulum bearing according to the invention;

Fig. 3

the structure of a sliding pendulum bearing according to a second advantageous embodiment of the sliding pendulum bearing according to the invention;

Fig. 4A

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring absolute building acceleration ("maximum of absolute acceleration") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("peak ground acceleration: PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing dimensioned according to a first embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") is shown in comparison to already known comparable bearings (see curves for "Friction Pendulum" and "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping");

Fig. 4B

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring horizontal bearing force ("maximum of bearing force") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the first embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in Comparison to already known comparable bearings (see curves for “Friction Pendulum” and “Pendulum with optimized viscous damping”) is shown;

Fig. 4C

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring bearing displacement ("maximum of total bearing displacement") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the first embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in Comparison to already known comparable bearings (see curves for “Friction Prendulum” and “Pendulum with optimized viscous damping”) is shown;

Fig. 4D

a diagram in which the course of the recentering error ("residual total bearing displacement") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the first embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in comparison to already known comparable bearings (see curves for “Friction Pendulum” and “Pendulum with optimized viscous damping”) are shown;

Fig. 5A

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring absolute building acceleration ("maximum of absolute acceleration") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to a second embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in Comparison to an already known comparable bearing is shown (see curve for “Friction Pendulum”);

Fig. 5B

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring horizontal bearing force ("maximum of bearing force") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the second embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in Comparison to an already known comparable bearing is shown (see curve for “Friction Pendulum”);

Fig. 5C

a diagram in which the course of the maximum occurring bearing displacement ("maximum of total bearing displacement") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the second embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in Comparison to an already known comparable bearing is shown (see curve for “Friction Pendulum”);

Fig. 5D

a diagram in which the course of the recentering error ("residual total bearing displacement") as a function of the peak ground acceleration ("PGA") of a sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the second embodiment of the design method (cf. curve for "MAURER Adaptive Pendulum") in comparison to one already known comparable bearings are shown (see curve for “Friction Pendulum”);

In the Figures 2 and 3 The schematic structure of a sliding pendulum bearing 5 is shown in accordance with a particularly advantageous embodiment of the present invention. Similar to above in reference Fig. 1C Double with joint described, the sliding pendulum bearings 5 shown include a first sliding plate 1 with a first main sliding surface 10, a second sliding plate 2 with a second main sliding surface 20, a slider 3 divided into two slider parts 3a and 3b and various sliding elements 4 and 4a. The first slider part 3a is in flat contact with the first main sliding surface 10 of the first sliding plate 1 via a sliding element 4, while the second slider part 3b is in flat contact with the second main sliding surface 20 of the second sliding plate 2 via another sliding element 4. The two slider parts 3a and 3b in turn are in flat contact with one another via the sliding element 4a. The only difference of the in Figure 3 shown embodiment to the one in Figure 2 The exemplary embodiment shown is that in Figure 3 shown sliding pendulum bearing 5 on the second sliding plate 2 has a limiting means 6, which limits the travel capacity of the slider 3 on the second main sliding surface 20 and is designed here in particular as a limiting ring.

At this point it should be made clear that the limiting means 6 is particularly advantageous for certain load cases, but is not necessarily necessary to form a sliding pendulum bearing according to the present invention. It must also be made clear that the limiting means 6 does not limit the entire travel capacity of the bearing, since the limiting means 6 limits the maximum movement at most on one of the two main sliding surfaces.

As already described above, in a sliding pendulum bearing of the double type with a joint, the sum of the effective radii of curvature of its main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 corresponds to the effective radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface 10 of a sliding pendulum bearing of the single type. Furthermore, the coefficients of friction of the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 of the double with joint are identical to one another. This means that in the double with joint, both main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 are structurally identical to one another and therefore both main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 are designed for the same load case. This serves to distribute a bearing movement occurring in the sliding pendulum bearing evenly between the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20, which results in approximately half of the horizontal installation space required by a single.

In contrast to this, the in Figures 2 and 3 Sliding pendulum bearings 5 shown, the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 are designed for two different load cases. This means that, in contrast to the double with a joint, the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 differ from one another at least with regard to their radius of curvature and/or their coefficient of friction.

In the in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 In the exemplary embodiments shown, the radii of curvature and the coefficients of friction of the first main sliding surfaces 10 essentially correspond to the radius of curvature and the coefficient of friction of the first main sliding surface 10 of a corresponding single 5. This means that the radius of curvature of the respective first main sliding surface is almost twice as large as that of a corresponding double with a joint. Furthermore, the respective second main sliding surface 20 of the advantageous exemplary embodiment 5 shown has an effective radius of curvature, which essentially corresponds to the effective radius of curvature of the first main sliding surface 10 and is therefore also twice as large as the radius of curvature of the second main sliding surface 20 of a corresponding double with a joint. The coefficient of friction of the respective second main sliding surface 20 is also significantly smaller than the coefficient of friction of the respective first main sliding surface 10 and is in the range of lubricated friction, i.e. in the range of 0.2% to 2%, here for example 1.0%.

Consequently, they differ in the Figures 2 and 3 shown sliding pendulum bearing 5 in particular with regard to the values of the radii of curvature of the respective first main sliding surface 10 and the respective second main sliding surface 20 as well as based on the coefficient of friction of the respective second skin sliding surface 20 of a corresponding double with joint known from the prior art.

The respective first main sliding surface 10 is designed for the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake, while the respective second main sliding surface 20 is designed for a peak ground acceleration value that is lower than that of the design earthquake.

If there is now a suggestion one of the in the Figures 2 and 3 schematically shown sliding pendulum bearing 5, the slider 3 will first move along the respective second main sliding surface 20 over the second sliding plate 2 (for example to the left), while essentially maintaining its position relative to the respective first sliding plate 1.

With the sliding pendulum bearing 5 with limiting means 6 on the main sliding surface 20, approximately the following happens (cf. Fig. 3 ): As soon as the slider 3 reaches the limiting means 6, the slider can no longer move in this direction (i.e. to the left) along the sliding plate 2, which means that if the excitation strength is sufficient, the slider 3 now moves along the first main sliding surface 10 of the first sliding plate 1 is carried out until the reversal point of the excitation is reached. As soon as the reversal point of the excitation is reached and the excitation turns in the opposite direction, the slider 3 is first moved along the second main sliding surface 20 Sliding plate 2 moves (to the right) to the other side of the limiting means 6. As soon as the slider 3 has reached the limiting means 6 again, its movement relative to the second sliding plate 2 is no longer possible. From then on, the remaining excitation is absorbed by a movement of the slider 3 along the first main sliding surface 10 of the first sliding plate 1. This game is repeated until there is no longer any excitation and the slider advantageously aligns itself again in or as close as possible to the respective center of the two sliding plates 2 and 1.

With the sliding pendulum bearing 5 without limiting means on the main sliding surface 20, approximately the following happens (cf. Fig. 2 ): The glider will also move relative to the second main sliding surface 20 as soon as the frictional force on the second main sliding surface 20 is equal to the total force of the first main sliding surface 10, which is the sum of the frictional force on the second main sliding surface 20 and the downhill force from the curvature of the main sliding surface 20 is. This state of movement can also occur in the sliding pendulum bearing 5 with a limiting ring, depending on the design of the effective radii and coefficients of friction of the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20. In this case, the slider will only arrive at the limiting means of the main sliding surface 20 at a later point in time. The main difference between the sliding pendulum bearing 5 with limiting means and the sliding pendulum bearing 5 without limiting means is that the former leads to a slightly smaller maximum bearing movement in the event of the largest probable earthquake than the latter, but the insulation of the former is slightly less good than the latter, but always Much better than the conventional single or double type sliding pendulum bearing.

In contrast to this bearing movement of the bearing according to the invention, which is limited primarily to one of the two sliding plates, in the conventional double with joint, any bearing movement that occurs is uniformly distributed throughout the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20. This leads to poorer insulation behavior for most possible peak ground accelerations of possible earthquakes. By designing the two main sliding surfaces 10 and 20 for different load cases, it is achieved that the corresponding sliding pendulum bearing 5 is designed not only for a peak ground acceleration value, but for a large range of possible peak ground acceleration values and thus overall a sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping that is closer and therefore better Insulation behavior over a large range of possible peak ground acceleration values.

Below, two examples of dimensioning methods for corresponding sliding pendulum bearings are presented and the resulting sliding pendulum bearing is compared with a corresponding conventional sliding pendulum bearing of the single type.

berechnet. Der hieraus erhaltene Radius entspricht dabei dem Radius der ersten Hauptgleitfläche eines entsprechenden Singles.First, a dimensioning of the parameters of the sliding pendulum bearing is carried out based on the dimensioning of a corresponding single. For this purpose, the radius of curvature R _eff,1 of the first main sliding surface is calculated from the intended insulation period T _ISO according to the formula $${\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{eff}\mathrm{,1}}=\mathrm{G}\times {\left({\mathrm{T}}_{\mathrm{ISO}}/2\mathrm{<figure-callout\; id="2"\; label="\pi "\; filenames="imgf0001.png,imgf0002.png"\; state="\{\{state\}\}">\pi </figure-callout>}\right)}^2$$

calculated. The radius obtained from this corresponds to the radius of the first main sliding surface of a corresponding single.

Subsequently, the coefficient of friction µ ₁ for the first main sliding surface with the radius R _eff,1 is determined assuming a single for the peak ground acceleration value of the assumed design earthquake using dynamic simulation with optimization towards minimum absolute structural acceleration. Alternatively, the coefficient of friction μ ₁ for the first main sliding surface could also be determined using the linear method of the response spectrum. Now the radius R _eff,2 of the second main sliding surface is chosen to be equal to the radius R _eff,1 of the first main sliding surface and the coefficient of friction µ ₂ of the second main sliding surface is set with a value typical for lubricated friction. Furthermore, the maximum movement capacity of the slider on the two main sliding surfaces is calculated for the largest probable earthquake.

These steps serve a rough design of the parameters of the sliding pendulum bearing and are identical for the two examples of the design method according to the invention described here.

For this first dimensioning of the main sliding surface of the sliding pendulum bearing, the corresponding values for a sliding pendulum bearing of the single type are used.

In the examples shown here, it is assumed that the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake is 4 m/s ² and the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake is 6 m/s ² , i.e. 150% of the peak ground acceleration value of the design earthquake. Furthermore, an isolation period of 3.5 seconds should be obtained. The optimization of the coefficient of friction μ ₁ of the first main sliding surface 10 for a minimum absolute structural acceleration at the peak ground acceleration of 4 m/s ² results in a coefficient of friction of 3.0% in the present example. The one for the first main sliding surface 10 required movement capacity of d = 0.3m can be estimated from the single type movement capacity for the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake.

After the initial rough design of the sliding pendulum bearing, it is important to coordinate the intended main sliding surfaces with one another in such a way that the sliding pendulum bearing meets certain boundary conditions. For the first example, the goal is to obtain an approximately linear insulation behavior while at the same time minimizing absolute structural accelerations.

Based on the first design, the second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 is initially set equal to the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and the second coefficient of friction μ ₂ is set to a value of lubricated friction in the range of 0.2% to 2% and in set to 0.75% in this example.

According to this first design, the coefficient of friction μ ₁ of the first main sliding surface, the effective radius R _eff,2 of the second main sliding surface and the movement capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface D ₂ are varied until at least on average approximately the same over the entire range of the relevant peak ground acceleration values The smallest possible absolute building acceleration is achieved and the insulation behavior is as linear as possible. Finally, the required movement capacity D ₁ of the slider on the first main sliding surface is determined, which results in particular from the peak ground acceleration value of the largest probable earthquake.

In the present example, this optimization results in that the coefficient of friction µ ₁ of the first main sliding surface is 3.5%, the two radii of curvature R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 of the two main sliding surfaces are identical and correspond to the radius of curvature of the corresponding single, the coefficient of friction µ ₂ of the second main sliding surface is 0.85% and the necessary movement capacity of the glider on the second main sliding surface D ₂ is 0.130 m. The limitation of the movement capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface is achieved structurally by a limiting means provided in the sliding pendulum bearing.

The Figures 4A to 4D finally show diagrams in which the behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the design method just described compares to the behavior of a corresponding single and a corresponding sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping.

In Fig. 4A The absolute structure acceleration is shown as a function of the peak ground acceleration (PGA). When comparing the corresponding curves with one another, it can be seen that the sliding pendulum bearing obtained according to the design method described above (see curve for "Maurer Adaptive Pendulum") has an approximately linear course of the absolute structure acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration. Furthermore, the corresponding values for the absolute structural acceleration are significantly below the respective values of the corresponding single-type sliding pendulum bearing (see curve for “Friction Pendulum”). It can also be seen that the values obtained for the absolute structural acceleration for the sliding pendulum bearing dimensioned according to the embodiment are, on average, much closer to the values assumed to be ideal for the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping (see curve for "Pendulum with optimized viscous damping") , as the respective values for the corresponding single. Consequently, the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the embodiment of the present invention has better insulation behavior than a corresponding single, which means that stresses on the building can be better suppressed by the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the invention.

In Fig. 4B The maximum horizontal bearing force occurring for the corresponding bearings is shown as a function of the peak ground acceleration. The corresponding curves are very similar in their course to the corresponding ones in Fig. 3A curves shown, which corresponds to those referred to above Fig. 3A The findings obtained can essentially also be transferred to the maximum horizontal bearing forces.

In the diagram in Fig. 4C The maximum bearing movement is shown depending on the peak ground acceleration value for the corresponding bearings. It can be seen that the maximum bearing movement due to the largest probable earthquake for the bearing designed according to the invention is significantly smaller than the value of the conventional single or double type sliding pendulum bearing.

In Fig. 4D The re-centering error is shown as a function of the peak ground acceleration for the bearings described above. It can be seen from the diagram that for the correspondingly designed sliding pendulum bearing, there is a re-centering error of just over 10%, especially with the value for the peak ground acceleration of 3m/s ² . This means that for this peak ground acceleration value, the re-centering error of the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the present embodiment of the invention is higher than for the corresponding single or for the sliding pendulum bearing with optimal viscous damping. However, the recentering error does not exceed the limit of 50% and is even well below this limit. This Increased re-centering error is more than compensated for by the above-described optimized behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the present embodiment with regard to the maximum absolute structural acceleration, the maximum bearing force and the maximum bearing movement and is well below the limit of 50%, which means that the comparatively insignificant deterioration here is happily accepted.

For the second exemplary embodiment of the design method according to the invention, the aim is to achieve no bearing movement at low loads and to obtain an approximately linear behavior with minimal absolute structural acceleration for loads with higher peak ground acceleration values.

Starting from the first design of the sliding pendulum bearing described above based on the values that result for a corresponding sliding pendulum bearing of the Singles type, the second effective radius of curvature R _eff,2 is set equal to the first effective radius of curvature R _eff,1 and the second coefficient of friction is set to µ ₂ The value is set to 3.0% in order to ensure the required minimum shear resistance of 3% of the vertical load on the bearing (identical to 3% of the absolute acceleration in g).

In the course of matching the properties of the two main sliding surfaces to one another, the two coefficients of friction µ ₁ and µ ₂ , the radius of curvature R _eff,2 of the second main sliding surface, as well as the movement capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface are designed under the boundary conditions that the sliding pendulum bearing up to to a certain excitation should not be triggered and the sliding pendulum bearing should produce an approximately linear behavior of the absolute building acceleration as a function of the peak ground acceleration. This optimization is also carried out using dynamic simulation of the structure with sliding pendulum bearings.

In the present case, the results from the optimization show that the coefficient of friction μ ₁ of the first main sliding surface and the coefficient of friction μ ₂ of the second main sliding surface must be 3.0%, while the effective radii of the first main sliding surface and the second main sliding surface are R _eff,1 and R _eff,2 are both equal to the effective radius of the corresponding single. It is not necessary to limit the movement capacity of the slider on the second main sliding surface.

Analogous to the Figures 4A to 4D are in the Figures 5A to 5D the maximum absolute structural acceleration, the maximum bearing force, the maximum bearing movement and the re-centering error are shown as a function of the peak ground acceleration.

As shown in the diagrams in the Figures 5A and 5B As can be seen, the values for the maximum absolute structural acceleration and for the maximum bearing force for the sliding pendulum bearing dimensioned according to the second embodiment (see curves for "Maurer Adaptive Pendulum") are significantly lower than for the corresponding sliding pendulum bearing of the single type (see curves for " Friction Pendulum"). This means improved insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing designed according to the second embodiment compared to the corresponding single.

From the diagram in Fig. 5C It can be seen that the maximum bearing movements that occur for the sliding pendulum bearing dimensioned according to the second exemplary embodiment for small peak ground acceleration values are essentially identical to the maximum bearing movements of the corresponding single, but significantly lower maximum bearing movements are achieved, especially at higher values for the peak ground acceleration. Smaller bearing movements make it possible to provide less installation space for the corresponding sliding pendulum bearing and thus, in addition to reducing the cost of producing the sliding pendulum bearing due to lower material costs, also ensuring more efficient use of the accessible installation space.

From the in Fig. 5D The diagram shown shows that the improvements in terms of the maximum absolute structural accelerations as well as in terms of the maximum bearing forces that occur lead to an increase in the re-centering errors. However, the re-centering errors that occur for all relevant peak ground acceleration values are well below the limit of 50% and only slightly above the values for the corresponding single-type sliding pendulum bearing. However, this slight increase in re-centering errors is more than compensated for by the improvement in the insulation behavior of the sliding pendulum bearing in relation to the maximum absolute structural accelerations that occur and the maximum bearing forces that occur.

Of course, other specifications for the coordination or optimization of the two main sliding surfaces are also possible, which allow the resulting sliding pendulum bearing to be adapted to a variety of different requirements considerably better than the conventionally known sliding pendulum bearings and thereby have a variety of advantages, such as: lower manufacturing costs, a smaller required installation space, lower maintenance costs.

This results in a variety of adaptation and optimization options for both the design of the sliding pendulum bearing itself and the corresponding design method.

Reference symbol list

1:

first sliding plate

2:

second sliding plate

3:

Glider

3a, 3b, 3c, 3d:

Glider part

4, 4a, 4b:

Sliding element

5:

Sliding pendulum bearing

10:

first main sliding surface

20:

second main sliding surface

Claims (13)

1. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) for protecting a construction against dynamic stresses from predominantly horizontal earthquake excitation, having a first sliding plate (1), a second sliding plate (2) and a slider (3) movably arranged between both sliding plates, wherein each of the two sliding plates has a curved main sliding surface (10, 20) and the slider (3) is in surface contact with a first main sliding surface (10) of the first sliding plate (1) and with a second main sliding surface (20) of the second sliding plate (2),

   wherein the first main sliding surface (10) is designed for a first load case and the second main sliding surface (20) is designed for a second load case which differs from the first load case, wherein the first and the second load cases represent specific peak ground acceleration values of corresponding earthquakes, characterized in that

   the first main sliding surface has a first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 and the second main sliding surface has a second effective radius of curvature R_eff,2 , wherein the sum of R_eff,1 and R_eff,2 is at least 1.4 times the effective radius of curvature that is determined under the assumption that the sliding pendulum bearing (5) has only one single curved main sliding surface.
2. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to claim 1,
   characterized in that
   the first main sliding surface (10) is designed for a first load case with a value for a peak ground acceleration (PGA value) which corresponds at most to the PGA value of the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) and at least to the PGA value of the design basis earthquake (DBE).
3. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   R_eff,1 and R_eff,2 are each at least 0.7 times the effective radius of curvature of a sliding pendulum bearing having only one curved main sliding surface.
4. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   the first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 is approximately as large as for a sliding pendulum bearing with only one curved main sliding surface, and the second effective radius of curvature R_eff,2 is in the range from 0.75 to 2 times, and in particular in the range from 0.90 to 1.5 times the first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 and is particularly preferably equal to the first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1.
5. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   the first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 in metres corresponds approximately to 0.25 times the square of a desired isolation cycle duration T_ISO in seconds of the construction to be protected with sliding pendulum bearing (5).
6. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   the first main sliding surface (10) has a first coefficient of friction µ₁ for the friction with the slider (3) which is approximately as large as for a sliding pendulum bearing (5) having only one curved main sliding surface, and the second main sliding surface (20) has a second coefficient of friction µ₂ which is lower than µ₁ and which is in the range from about 0.2% to 1.7% when the second main sliding surface (20) is lubricated and in the range from about 2% to 3.5% when the second main sliding surface (20) is not lubricated.
7. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   the second main sliding surface (20) has a limitation means (6) for limiting the displacement capacity of the slider (3) on the second main sliding surface (20), wherein the limitation means (6) is designed in particular as an annular abutment and the limitation means does not limit the total displacement capacity of the bearing.
8. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to claim 7,
   characterized in that
   the limitation means (6) is formed such that the displacement capacity D₂ of the slider (3) on the second main sliding surface (20) is substantially less than or equal to the displacement capacity D₁ of the slider (3) on the first main sliding surface (10).
9. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to one of the preceding claims,
   characterized in that
   the slider (3) has two slider parts (3a, 3b) which are in surface contact with one another via a curved subsidiary sliding surface, wherein the first slider part (3a) is in contact with the first main sliding surface (10) and the second slider part (3b) is in contact with the second main sliding surface (20).
10. Sliding pendulum bearing (5) according to claim 9,
    characterized in that
    the sliding pendulum bearing (5) has different sliding paths, different coefficients of friction and different effective radii on the two main sliding surfaces.
11. Method for dimensioning a sliding pendulum bearing (5) for protecting a construction against dynamic stresses from predominantly horizontal earthquake excitation, having at least a first sliding plate (1), a second sliding plate (2) and a slider (3) movably arranged between both sliding plates (1, 2), wherein each of the two sliding plates (1, 2) has a curved main sliding surface (10, 20) and the slider (3) is in surface contact with a first main sliding surface (10) of the first sliding plate (1) and with a second main sliding surface (20) of the second sliding plate (2),

    wherein the first main sliding surface (10) is designed for a first load case and the second main sliding surface (20) is designed for a second load case which differs from the first load case, wherein the first and the second load cases represent specific peak ground acceleration values of corresponding earthquakes, characterized in that

    in a first step, a first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 and a first friction value µ₁ are determined for the first main sliding surface (10) under the assumption that the sliding pendulum bearing (5) has only one single main sliding surface, and a second effective radius of curvature R_eff,2 is selected for the second main sliding surface (20), which second effective radius of curvature R_eff,2 is selected in the range from 0.75 to 2 times, preferably in the range from 0.75 to 1.5 times the first effective radius of curvature R_eff,1 , and a second friction value µ₂ is selected for the second main sliding surface (20), which second friction value µ₂ is selected between 0.2% and 2.0%, preferably between 0.4% and 1.5% and more preferably between 0.6% and 1.25%, or which is less than or equal to the first friction value µ₁ , in order to ensure a predefined minimum shear resistance.
12. Method for dimensioning according to claim 11,
    characterized in that
    the slider (3) has two slider parts (3a, 3b) which are in surface contact with one another via a curved subsidiary sliding surface, wherein the first slider part (3a) is in contact with the first main sliding surface (10) and the second slider part (3b) is in contact with the second main sliding surface (20).
13. Method for dimensioning according to claim 11 or 12,
    characterized in that
    the first main sliding surface (10) is designed for a first load case with a value for a peak ground acceleration (PGA value) which corresponds at most to the PGA value of the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) and at least to the PGA value of the design basis earthquake (DBE).

Images